Subject: Re: re azcanv<br/>
Date: Oct 30, 2002 @ 23:30<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="7696.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic7696.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="7696.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="7698.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1290422352">--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &quot;m donner&quot; &lt;maxivan82@h...&gt; <br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; the monument you found i think may mark an old rendition of <br/>
&gt; the canv line<br/>
&gt; & i found it to be a little off line<br/>
&gt; when compared with the definitive pair of low slab markers<br/>
&gt; one of which can be seen in the foreground of the attached pic<br/>
&gt; just across the road from your taller marker<br/>
&gt; & i trust its mate can also still be found where i found it<br/>
&gt; in the corresponding location in arizona above the left bank<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; but the offset seemed to me so small that i dont think it couldve <br/>
 </span></blockquote>affected <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; your class b claim very much<br/>
&gt; even if you were basing it on that marker<br/>
&gt; while my hunch is you were just pinning the gps to the topo <br/>
 </span></blockquote>position anyway<br/>
<br/>
but a bigger problem with any class b claim to azcanv<br/>
even assuming one could gauge the exact centerline of the river<br/>
is that the 1960 azca compact defining the tripoint position<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/gov/175-176.html">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/gov/175-176.html</a><br/>
blunders by placing it at the intersection of this centerline<br/>
with not just 1 but 2 other lines<br/>
namely<br/>
b o t h<br/>
the oblique canv line<br/>
a n d<br/>
the 35th parallel of north latitude<br/>
<br/>
naturally no such triple conjunction actually occurs <br/>
not at any single asteriskoid intersection point anyway<br/>
but rather the conjunction must describe a very small triangle<br/>
with dimensions unknown<br/>
<br/>
however<br/>
of the 3 lines mentioned<br/>
it seems most conservative to prefer the river centerline first<br/>
since that is traditional & repeated elsewhere in the compact<br/>
& then to prefer the oblique line second<br/>
since it is demarcated by those 2 low slabs<br/>
whereas the reference to the latitudinal line seems so gratuitous <br/>
& most expendable<br/>
& i think most careful people would agree with that evaluation<br/>
<br/>
but in any case we are looking at very tiny differences here<br/>
which shouldnt adversely affect anyones class b claims<br/>
yet do leave the exact geoposition of azcanv in some question<br/>
<br/>
by contrast a far more extreme uncertainty occurs at ilinmi<br/>
involving hundreds of feet of difference in geoposition<br/>
but which i also like to think i bagged class b<br/>
<br/>
but that is a much longer story too</div>